Vipond v. Townsend

60 N.W. 430, 88 Wis. 285, 1894 Wisc. LEXIS 61
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 2, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 60 N.W. 430 (Vipond v. Townsend) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vipond v. Townsend, 60 N.W. 430, 88 Wis. 285, 1894 Wisc. LEXIS 61 (Wis. 1894).

Opinion

Newman, J.

It was not error to include the amount of the stipulated attorney’s fee in the judgment. The stipulation for the fee was a part of the contract on which the action was based. It became due as soon as the action was commenced. It was due at the time of the entry of judgment. Its recovery was incidental to the recovery upon the principal cause of action. This is analogous to the [287]*287uniform practice, from an earty day, of including stipulated attorney’s fees in foreclosure judgments. It has not been suspected that a separate action could be maintained for the recovery of such fees.

By the Court.— The judgment of the superior court of Douglas county is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Citizens Nat. Bank of Orange, Va. v. Waugh
78 F.2d 325 (Fourth Circuit, 1935)
Davis v. Cochran
76 Miss. 439 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1898)
Pirie v. Stern
72 N.W. 370 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1897)
Byers v. Bellan-Price Investment Co.
10 Colo. App. 74 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 N.W. 430, 88 Wis. 285, 1894 Wisc. LEXIS 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vipond-v-townsend-wis-1894.